DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
Didn't you follow the bad press last month?
The storyline was leading towards a big gay wedding between Maggie Sawyer and Batwoman which DC has decided is morally objectionable.
The storyline was leading towards a big gay wedding between Maggie Sawyer and Batwoman which DC has decided is morally objectionable.
Actually considering how easy it is to pirate comics, you would think that kids would be downloading a few comic books now and then when "collections" show up in the same place where they are downloading their Katee Perry songs.
So even though comics are "free" they still don't care.
How sad.
So even though comics are "free" they still don't care.
How sad.
Yep. They walked off the book so DC wasn't going to let them finish anything. Looking forward to them taking over Detective Comics.
You have to wonder how strategic DC will in sourcing new staff for Batwoman?
Orson Scott Card?
Orson Scott Card?
lol. That would by hysterical.
That would be hilarious but no, Marc Andreyko has been named the new writer.
What happens when you let Bob Harras and Dan Didio run a comic book company.
Direct a Porn Parody?
That's your answer to everything.
Manapul and Buccellato are taking over Detective Comics. Williams and Blackman have quit DC entirely.
Last edited:
^ I got confused for a second. LOL. My mistake.
So if everyone who believes in gay rights quits DC Comics... How will that effect their bottom line?
Contra, how does everyone who believes in gay rights who continues to support this mild antihomoliterati sleep at night without their conscience thundering about making them ill and lorn?
Is Chick Fillet any good?
Contra, how does everyone who believes in gay rights who continues to support this mild antihomoliterati sleep at night without their conscience thundering about making them ill and lorn?
Is Chick Fillet any good?
It's not about gay rights. DC just does't want most of its characters to be married. Same rule applies to straights
Well that's DC's explanation.
You can chose to believe in Santa Claus too.
Williams claims that he (and his creative partner) gave the editorial department a years warning before the editors swooped in and nixed the wedding.
365 days.
(ish)
Surely that means that the wedding should have been grandfathered in, or that 364 days of approval should ave trumped one day of disapproval? Or are we supposed to beleive that the no weddings for any one rule was already in effect a year ago and they just forgot?
Besides, it doesn't matter why DC said "no" to a gay marriage when they should have been sensible enough to predict the optics and roll with it.
You can chose to believe in Santa Claus too.
Williams claims that he (and his creative partner) gave the editorial department a years warning before the editors swooped in and nixed the wedding.
365 days.
(ish)
Surely that means that the wedding should have been grandfathered in, or that 364 days of approval should ave trumped one day of disapproval? Or are we supposed to beleive that the no weddings for any one rule was already in effect a year ago and they just forgot?
Besides, it doesn't matter why DC said "no" to a gay marriage when they should have been sensible enough to predict the optics and roll with it.
And how many of DC's straight characters are married? How many are in a relationship with the character who's supposed to be their "soul mate"? Lois Lane isn't Superman's girlfriend and Barry Allen isn't dating Iris West, much less married to her.
OTOH, DC's editors aren't the most attentive lot. I can see them missing a message or two.
OTOH, DC's editors aren't the most attentive lot. I can see them missing a message or two.
Similar threads
- Poll
